Shiba Inu对Telegram空投发出严重警告

币界网Publicado a 2024-08-13Actualizado a 2024-08-13

币界网报道:

Shiba-Inu的官方诈骗频道Shibalarmy Scam Alerts呼吁公众关注流行消息平台Telegram上日益增长的诈骗策略。

在最近的一篇X帖子中,该频道警告Shiba Inu爱好者注意Telegram上存在多个虚假空投团体。

这些方案通常鼓励参与者执行特定任务,以换取免费代币。空投背后的恶意行为者随后提示用户连接钱包以接收免费代币。用户在遵循指示并连接钱包后,资金可能会被耗尽。

最新警告

由于基于Telegram的空投增长,Shibrarm Scam Alert警告社区要保持警惕,避免将钱包连接到提供免费代币的可疑网站。

Shibrarm诈骗警报的担忧源于这样一个事实,即这些恶意空投计划是为了耗尽参与者的资金而创建的。

“保持安全,Shib Army,睁大眼睛,”专注于Shiba Inu的骗局频道警告说。

此外,该频道在Telegram上附上了其中一个虚假空投组的样本。这个名为K9 Finance DAO News的恶意组织拥有11069名成员,他们敦促人们转发空投帖子,以换取价值2000美元的KNINE代币。就上下文而言,K9 Finance DAO是Shiba Inu的官方流动性质押合作伙伴。

Telegram上不断增长的骗局

加密货币领域的恶意行为者数量激增。这些坏人设计了几种方法来窃取用户的资金。最近,他们一直在使用虚假空投计划,并鼓励用户完成不同的任务以获得免费代币。

与此同时,流行的消息平台Telegram已成为这些欺诈活动的热点。这发生在那些错过了Notcoin空投(一款赚取Telegram游戏的点击)的人寻求类似机会之后。

不出所料,骗子们利用了这一需求,推出了类似的计划,并敦促参与者连接他们的钱包。

这永远不会有好结果,因为参与者通常会被骗。因此,必须始终对任何空投计划进行尽职调查,以避免丢失您的加密货币资产。

Shiba Inu之前的警告

好消息是,Shibrarm诈骗警报不断向SHIB持有人通报该行业新的欺诈计划。

6月,该频道警告用户存在冒充Shiba Inu生态系统团队成员的虚假Telegram账户。它还警告社区不要在同一时间段内参与名人主导的加密项目。

这些警告有助于保护Shiba Inu社区成员,防止他们成为恶意计划的受害者。

Lecturas Relacionadas

The Ethereum Foundation Has Split?! An In-depth Look at Ethlabs' "Bright Future"

"Ethereum Foundation Splits? Understanding Ethlabs and Its 'Bright Future'" Former Ethereum Foundation members Ansgar Dietrichs, Barnabé Monnot, Caspar Schwarz-Schilling, Josh Rudolf, and Julian Ma have announced the launch of Ethlabs, an independent non-profit research and development lab. Announced on June 22nd, the initiative comes amidst discussions about the need for new organizational structures within the Ethereum ecosystem, a point highlighted by Bankless founder David Hoffman. Ethlabs' mission is to establish Ethereum as the foundational settlement layer for the global economy. The organization positions itself as a bridge connecting frontline developers, applications, and user needs with the core protocol. It aims to translate real-world demands into protocol improvements, industry standards, and deployable products. The founding team brings significant expertise: Dietrichs and Monnot are highly cited researchers in areas like Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) and MEV, while Schwarz-Schilling, Rudolf, and Ma contribute backgrounds in economic modeling, consensus research, and applied cryptography. Initial supporters include BitMine, a major corporate ETH treasury; Sharplink, another treasury firm; and Consensys founder Joe Lubin in a personal capacity. Community backers include figures like Uniswap's Hayden Adams and Base's Jesse Pollak. The timing coincides with internal Ethereum Foundation discussions about "spinout" projects. While Ethlabs and the Foundation share research interests like MEV mitigation, Ethlabs frames its role not as a competitor but as part of a shift from a "single-core coordination model" to a "multi-R&D entity collaboration model." It views Ethereum as a public project belonging to all builders, with Ethlabs as one node in a broader governance network. Ultimately, Ethlabs represents an organizational evolution within the maturing Ethereum ecosystem. The key question is whether multiple research bodies can collaborate effectively to advance Ethereum as a competitive global settlement infrastructure.

Odaily星球日报Hace 4 min(s)

The Ethereum Foundation Has Split?! An In-depth Look at Ethlabs' "Bright Future"

Odaily星球日报Hace 4 min(s)

'Bear' Doomsday Prophecy: AI 'Reaching Its Peak', U.S. Stocks to Top Out Fastest in Q3, Down 30-50%

"A Short Seller's Dire Prediction: AI Boom Fading, US Stocks to Peak by Q3 with 30-50% Decline" Prominent macro investors Jeffrey Gundlach and Felix Zulauf warn that the AI-driven market rally is nearing its end, forecasting a major US stock market correction of 30-50%, potentially beginning as early as Q3. Their analysis points to alarming parallels with historical market tops, citing extreme concentration in the top AI-related stocks within the S&P 500. Zulauf's bearish thesis hinges on unsustainable capital expenditure trends among major cloud companies, negative free cash flow emergence, and soaring semiconductor prices. Gundlach highlights dangerous parallels to the 1999 tech bubble peak. A key divergence from conventional wisdom is Gundlach's view that long-term Treasury yields will not fall meaningfully even during a recession, due to America's structurally out-of-control fiscal deficits and soaring interest costs. He warns this could force the government into yield curve control or even a sovereign debt restructuring. Both investors express severe concerns about the opaque private credit market, drawing parallels to the pre-2008 financial crisis environment. They allege widespread rating inflation, misrepresented credit quality, liquidity illusions, and fraudulent asset valuations within this sector. The analysis links the AI boom and private credit crisis through financing costs. They argue that as AI companies' cash flows weaken and they seek funding, a high and sticky long-term interest rate environment will severely stress lower-rated corporate borrowers, exposing cracks in credit markets. Finally, they predict a regime shift where the US dollar weakens and US equities underperform global markets, marking the end of their long dominance. The stage is set for a significant market reversal.

marsbitHace 11 min(s)

'Bear' Doomsday Prophecy: AI 'Reaching Its Peak', U.S. Stocks to Top Out Fastest in Q3, Down 30-50%

marsbitHace 11 min(s)

Why Does No One Buy DeFi Insurance?

**Title: Why Isn't DeFi Insurance Being Bought?** DeFi insurance, which promised automated, unbiased payouts via smart contracts, has failed to gain traction. The core issue is economic: high premiums severely erode the yields that attract users to DeFi in the first place. For example, insuring a USDC deposit on Aave V3 could cost 1.5–2.5% of the annual yield, leaving a net return barely above a savings account. For riskier platforms like Maple Finance or Ethena, premiums can even turn net yields negative. Consequently, users often forgo insurance, as it nullifies their profit motive. The market also suffers from structural flaws. First, DeFi risks are highly correlated (e.g., an oracle failure can impact multiple protocols simultaneously), unlike the independent risks in traditional insurance. This makes large-scale events potentially catastrophic for insurers. Second, the total capital in DeFi insurance pools (e.g., Nexus Mutual's ~$81.5M) is minuscule compared to the hundreds of billions in total value locked (TVL), creating a massive capacity gap. A single major hack could drain the entire industry's reserves. Furthermore, the governance model where tokenholders vote on claims creates a conflict of interest, incentivizing them to deny payouts to protect their own funds. As a result, the sector is shrinking. While pioneers like Nexus Mutual are pivoting to preventative measures (bug bounties) and seeking external capital via reinsurance, the fundamental problems remain. DeFi insurance represents a public good—its stability benefits the entire ecosystem—but without a mechanism to share costs, a "tragedy of the commons" ensues where no one is willing to pay, leaving the system vulnerable.

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

Why Does No One Buy DeFi Insurance?

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片